Population stability of a tree-galling aphid, <i>Baizongia pistaciae</i>, at three spatial scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The population stability of Baizongia pistaciae (Linnaeus) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) on its primary host, the tree Pistacia palaestina Boissier (Anachardiaceae), was investigated using 17–20 years of data from a study of gall abundance on individual trees in Israel. Abundance varied by at least an order of magnitude among adjacent trees, among locations, and among years. Stability was quantified for the alternate-year cohorts as population variability (PV) and persistence, at three spatial scales. PV (a proportion between 0 and 1) was similar between cohorts and declined with population scale – subpopulation (a tree): 0.676 ± 0.092 (±1 SD, n = 40); population: 0.581 ± 0.098 (±1 SD, n = 6); region: 0.424 (0.345 and 0.503, n = 2). Persistence (proportion of years that galls were present) was usually near 0.9, but 0.1 for some subpopulations, and 1.0 at the population and regional scales. Although protected within large galls on long-lived trees, the PV of B. pistaciae was similar to that of native, free-living aphid species on more ephemeral herbaceous hosts, but lower than for introduced aphid species. Persistence of B. pistaciae decreased as abundance decreased but not as PV increased. PV did not increase with the length of the study period; and declined with increasing population scale, because abundance was not synchronised among subpopulations or populations. PV was similar among populations, suggesting this parameter is characteristic of the species, although positive correlations between cohorts on a tree showed that PV was affected by the site-specific tree–grass habitats in which this species lives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".